II. RESPONSE TO GEPA 417(a) (Continued)
based on the total funds awarded to local districts divided by the number
of LEP students served.
Students Served« In FY 1984? 564 Basic grants were awarded to districts
to serve about 229,980 LEP and 45,739 non-LEP students speakiny more than
90 different languages. Under the Demonstration Projects program, 49
projects in 23 States were funded to serve about 16,349 students speakiny
20 different languages. Thirty percent of the projects served fewer than
200 students, 34 percent enrolled from 200-399 students, and 36 percent
served 400 or more students.
Student Coverage: Considerations of whether the program serves all elig-
ible children depends on how many children need Dilingual education.
Programs funded by State and local education agencies must also be counted.
For the 1983-84 school year, Title VII reported serving 159,900 children in
564 Basic Projects and 15,850 students in 49 Demonstration Projects.
Additional federally funded bilingual education and English as a second
language (ESL) services were provided under Title I, ESEA. Services were
also provided by the Refugee Assistance Act to 93,920 children (see
f Chapter 203) and the ECIA Chapter 1 Migrant program (see Chapter 102,
* language services unknown).
In 1983, 22 States and American Samoa had legislation that either mandated
t bilingual education for LEP students or services for instructing LEP
persons. In 1983, State expenditures for instructional services to LEP
4 students were approximately $223 million. States provided special language
' instructional services to an estimated 925,000 LEP students in 1983 (El).
t Eligibility for Title VII Assistance. According to the Act, limited Eng-
lish proficient students are eligible for Title VII assistance. Title
T VII, ESEA defines "limited English proficiency" to mean an individual who
^ was not born in the United States or whose native language is other than
4 English; who comes from a home environment in which a language other than
* English is most relied upon for communication; or who is an American
* Indian or Alaskan native and comes from an environment in which a language
t other than English has had a significant impact on his or her level of
English language proficiency and who, "by reason thereof" has sufficient
4 difficulty in understanding, speaking, reading, and writing the English
language to deny the individual the opportunity to learn successfully in
class rooms where the language of instruction is English. Local districts
4 in which such students are enrolled are eligible to apply for Title VII
assistance. Title VII grants are awarded on a discretionary basis.
Identifying such children has turned out to be difficult. The English
Language Proficiency Survey of 1982 is the Departmentss most current
^ population survey of children with limited English proficiency. Preliminary
* results indicate that the number of children aged 5-14 who come from a
i non-English language background and are therefore language minority